Below is my article this weekend in Al Jazaerra on the powerful lobby and industry supporting our various conflicts abroad as well as counterterrorism efforts. I previously testified before Congress on this industry and the government’s inflation of counterterrorism numbers to justify huge domestic budgets at the Justice Department FBI, and other agencies. I wrote the article for the anniversary this month of Eisenhower’s famous Military-Industrial Complex speech.
In January 1961, US President Dwight D Eisenhower used his farewell address to warn the nation of what he viewed as one of its greatest threats: the military-industrial complex composed of military contractors and lobbyists perpetuating war.
Eisenhower warned that “an immense military establishment and a large arms industry” had emerged as a hidden force in US politics and that Americans “must not fail to comprehend its grave implications”. The speech may have been Eisenhower’s most courageous and prophetic moment. Fifty years and some later, Americans find themselves in what seems like perpetual war. No sooner do we draw down on operations in Iraq than leaders demand an intervention in Libya or Syria or Iran. While perpetual war constitutes perpetual losses for families, and ever expanding budgets, it also represents perpetual profits for a new and larger complex of business and government interests.
The new military-industrial complex is fuelled by a conveniently ambiguous and unseen enemy: the terrorist. Former President George W Bush and his aides insisted on calling counter-terrorism efforts a “war”. This concerted effort by leaders like former Vice President Dick Cheney (himself the former CEO of defence-contractor Halliburton) was not some empty rhetorical exercise. Not only would a war maximise the inherent powers of the president, but it would maximise the budgets for military and homeland agencies.
This new coalition of companies, agencies, and lobbyists dwarfs the system known by Eisenhower when he warned Americans to “guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence… by the military-industrial complex”. Ironically, it has had some of its best days under President Barack Obama who has radically expanded drone attacks and claimed that he alone determines what a war is for the purposes of consulting Congress.
Investment in homeland security companies is expected to yield a 12 percent annual growth through 2013 – an astronomical return when compared to other parts of the tanking economy.
Good for economy?
While few politicians are willing to admit it, we don’t just endure wars we seem to need war – at least for some people. A study showed that roughly 75 percent of the fallen in these wars come from working class families. They do not need war. They pay the cost of the war. Eisenhower would likely be appalled by the size of the industrial and governmental workforce committed to war or counter-terrorism activities. Military and homeland budgets now support millions of people in an otherwise declining economy. Hundreds of billions of dollars flow each year from the public coffers to agencies and contractors who have an incentive to keep the country on a war-footing – and footing the bill for war.
Across the country, the war-based economy can be seen in an industry which includes everything from Homeland Security educational degrees to counter-terrorism consultants to private-run preferred traveller programmes for airport security gates. Recently, the “black budget” of secret intelligence programmes alone was estimated at $52.6bn for 2013. That is only the secret programmes, not the much larger intelligence and counterintelligence budgets. We now have 16 spy agencies that employ 107,035 employees. This is separate from the over one million people employed by the military and national security law enforcement agencies.
The core of this expanding complex is an axis of influence of corporations, lobbyists, and agencies that have created a massive, self-sustaining terror-based industry.
The contractors
In the last eight years, trillions of dollars have flowed to military and homeland security companies. When the administration starts a war like Libya, it is a windfall for companies who are given generous contracts to produce everything from replacement missiles to ready-to-eat meals.
In the first 10 days of the Libyan war alone, the administration spent roughly $550m. That figure includes about $340m for munitions – mostly cruise missiles that must be replaced. Not only did Democratic members of Congress offer post-hoc support for the Libyan attack, but they also proposed a permanent authorisation for presidents to attack targets deemed connected to terrorism – a perpetual war on terror. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) offers an even steadier profit margin. According to Morgan Keegan, a wealth management and capital firm, investment in homeland security companies is expected to yield a 12 percent annual growth through 2013 – an astronomical return when compared to other parts of the tanking economy.
The lobbyists
There are thousands of lobbyists in Washington to guarantee the ever-expanding budgets for war and homeland security. One such example is former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff who pushed the purchase of the heavily criticised (and little tested) full-body scanners used in airports. When Chertoff was giving dozens of interviews to convince the public that the machines were needed to hold back the terror threat, many people were unaware that the manufacturer of the machine is a client of the Chertoff Group, his highly profitable security consulting agency. (Those hugely expensive machines were later scrapped after Rapiscan, the manufacturer, received the windfall.)
Lobbyists maintain pressure on politicians by framing every budget in “tough on terror” versus “soft on terror” terms. They have the perfect products to pitch – products that are designed to destroy themselves and be replaced in an ever-lasting war on terror.
The agencies
It is not just revolving doors that tie federal agencies to these lobbyists and companies. The war-based economy allows for military and homeland departments to be virtually untouchable. Environmental and social programmes are eliminated or curtailed by billions as war-related budgets continue to expand to meet “new threats”.
A massive counterterrorism system has been created employing tens of thousands of personnel with billions of dollars to search for domestic terrorists.
With the support of an army of lobbyists and companies, cabinet members like former DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, are invincible in Washington. When citizens complained of watching their children groped by the TSA, Napolitano defiantly retorted that if people did not want their children groped, they should yield and use the unpopular full-body machines – the machines being sold by her predecessor, Chertoff.
It is not just the Defense and DHS departments that enjoy the war windfall. Take the Department of Justice (DOJ). A massive counterterrorism system has been created employing tens of thousands of personnel with billions of dollars to search for domestic terrorists. The problem has been a comparative shortage of actual terrorists to justify the size of this internal security system.
Accordingly, the DOJ has counted everything from simple immigration cases to credit card fraud as terror cases in a body count approach not seen since the Vietnam War. For example, the DOJ claimed to have busted a major terror-network as part of “Operation Cedar Sweep”, where Lebanese citizens were accused of sending money to terrorists. They were later forced to drop all charges against all 27 defendants as unsupportable. It turned out to be a bunch of simple head shops. Nevertheless, the new internal security system continues to grind on with expanding powers and budgets. A few years ago, the DOJ even changed the definition of terrorism to allow for an ever-widening number of cases to be considered “terror-related”.
Symbiotic relationship
Our economic war-dependence is matched by political war-dependence. Many members represent districts with contractors that supply homeland security needs and our on-going wars.
Even with polls showing that the majority of Americans are opposed to continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the new military-industrial complex continues to easily muster the necessary support from both Democrats and Republicans in Congress. It is a testament to the influence of this alliance that hundreds of billions are being spent in Afghanistan and Iraq while Congress is planning to cut billions from core social programmes, including a possible rollback on Medicare due to lack of money. None of that matters. It doesn’t even matter that Afghan President Hamid Karzai has called the US the enemy and said he wishes that he had joined the Taliban. Even the documented billions stolen by government officials in Iraq and Afghanistan are treated as a mere cost of doing business.
It is what Eisenhower described as the “misplaced power” of the military-industrial complex – power that makes public opposition and even thousands of dead soldiers immaterial. War may be hell for some but it is heaven for others in a war-dependent economy.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and has testified in Congress on the massive counter-terrorism budgets and bureaucracy in the United States.
There is some force or power that keeps presidents from being able to do something for the people to stop deadly militarization, a germ, from becoming an epidemic that destroys freedom:
(Wee The People – 2, emphasis removed).
“Lance”
People who associate in any way with Al Jazerra give reason enough to keep the U.S. military industrial complex alive.and well.
I’m a former soldier, not a coward who fires spitballs from my computer. Maintaining this military complex is paramount, for instance, when the need to wipe out radical threats coming out of the “religion of peace.” This is our mission and we will complete it.
Get used to it.
=================
Are you one of those automaton trolls created by the military to spread propaganda:
(Guardian).
Lance,
What exactly is an “islamofascist”?
Given your avatar and the brief text associated with it you should be able to offer a succinct definition.
Lance,
Didn’t your choice of avatar say, “[s]omeday this war will end?”
People who associate in any way with Al Jazerra give reason enough to keep the U.S. military industrial complex alive.and well.
I’m a former soldier, not a coward who fires spitballs from my computer. Maintaining this military complex is paramount, for instance, when the need to wipe out radical threats coming out of the “religion of peace.” This is our mission and we will complete it.
Get used to it.
Bron,
“. . . the cost of war would come directly from the pockets of the citizens . . .”
“. . . not from some large communal pot of tax dollars ostensibly used for running the government.”
Where’s the difference, Bron?
Also, shouldn’t “war” be plural, as in “wars”?
It seems to me that our entire history is being ignored. Since its conception we have been at war with someone every year of our existence.
President Eisenhower said some very true things about the military-Insustrial complex” — but he said them with one foot out the door as he left the presidency. Hardly “courageous.” During his eiight years in office, howeer, he did little to oppose, and much to aid and abet, the very military-industrial complex that he criticized once it no longer concerned his own political career and became, instead, his successor’s problem. Agian, he said some true things but he said them once it didn’t matter. I just think we ought to remember this.
Jill,
on 1, January 12, 2014 at 11:07 am
And just imagine what resale price our local police department can snag the overstock for…
JT: “The speech may have been Eisenhower’s most courageous and prophetic moment.”
***
Indeed it was. Unfortunately it was a warning that was not heeded, there was just too much money to make in ignoring it.
It would be nice to see this Blawg posting lifted and dropped as a column n one of the papers you write for, it’s needed as a reminder.
Another unsavory aspect to the endless war is that military equipment, expensive and quickly obsolete or discarded as unnecessary is being handed off to city and state police departments at negligible cost: half million dollar armored fighting vehicles selling for $2-3000.00, airplanes, surveillance equipment, etc. The police are being turned into a domestic military force.
“Cops use armored military vehicles to deliver shock and awe during routine police work”
http://thedailysmug.blogspot.com/2014/01/cops-use-armored-military-vehicles-to.html#sthash.verW9VGp.dpbs
Gee the Bushes are the first Republicans that went to war since Abe Lincoln
As Glenn Greenwald said:
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/421405265003425792
“Fifty years and some later, Americans find themselves in what seems like perpetual war. No sooner do we draw down on operations in Iraq than leaders demand an intervention in Libya or Syria or Iran. While perpetual war constitutes perpetual losses for families, and ever expanding budgets, it also represents perpetual profits for a new and larger complex of business and government interests.” -Jonathan Turley
Beating the drums of war, a couple of years ago…
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/136917/matthew-kroenig/time-to-attack-iran
…and again, now:
“Still Time to Attack Iran
The Illusion of a Comprehensive Nuclear Deal”
By Matthew Kroenig
January 7, 2014
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/140632/matthew-kroenig/still-time-to-attack-iran
Excerpt:
“The most important change in the past two years, however, is that President Barack Obama has come out forcefully on my side of this debate and against the arguments of my critics. As he has stated many times since March 2012, a nuclear-armed Iran “not a challenge that can be contained” and the United States must be prepared to do “everything required to prevent it.” Many outside the Beltway express skepticism when Obama makes such threats, but his closest advisers insist that he is fully committed to preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East and is prepared to use force if necessary to keep Tehran from getting the bomb. Fortunately, the situation is not yet at that point. For now, everyone should hope for a satisfactory diplomatic resolution to the crisis. But, if that effort fails, no one, especially not Iran’s leaders, should delude themselves about what should come next.”
itchinBay Dog:
That sounds pretty reasonable. Are you a Lab or a Golden? Definitely not a Doberman or a Shepard.
“War prosperity is like the prosperity that an earthquake or a plague brings. The earthquake means good business for construction workers, and cholera improves the business of physicians, pharmacists, and undertakers; but no one has for that reason yet sought to celebrate earthquakes and cholera as stimulators of the productive forces in the general interest.”
“War can really cause no economic boom, at least not directly, since an increase in wealth never does result from destruction of goods.”
(Von Mises Nation, State, and Economy, p. 154)
“It is certainly true that our age is full of conflicts which generate war. However, these conflicts do not spring from the operation of the unhampered market society. It may be permissible to call them economic conflicts because they concern that sphere of human life which is, in common speech, known as the sphere of economic activities. But it is a serious blunder to infer from this appellation that the source of these conflicts are conditions which develop within the frame of a market society. It is not capitalism that produces them, but precisely the anticapitalistic policies designed to check the functioning of capitalism. They are an outgrowth of the various governments’ interference with business, of trade and migration barriers and discrimination against foreign labor, foreign products, and foreign capital.” (1st Ed. Human Action, p. 680; 3rd Ed. Human Action, p. 684)
“What has transformed the limited war between royal armies into total war, the clash between peoples, is not technicalities of military art, but the substitution of the welfare state for the laissez-faire state.” (1st Ed. Human Action, p. 820; 3rd Ed. Human Action, p. 824 )
May Day is May 1st. The people need to arrive in Washington DC and demand an end to all the wars and an end to the war plans for the plans for war on the table. Until the people in this country start protesting and electing protestors we will stay on the same yellow page on the same yellow brick road in the same Chrysler convertible owned by Fiat. And, another thing. Just because college is expensive and Sonnyboy can not get in a good trade union in GA does not mean that you send him off to join the Army so that you can say Thank you for your service.
Should May 1 be the day? Or should it be Memorial Day, or the Fourth of July? I wish that all the components of the Occupy and other protest movements could get together on this matter. Washington, DC is a spacious city. Any protest or demonstration involving fewer than 50,000 people is unlikely to garner very much notice. Coalition building is essential: divided we fall. You’ll never get me to come to D.C. for a demonstration unless I know it’s going to be colossal.
Platos Cave:
Banks dont create the money. The FED sets the interest rates.
The MIC is a government created and controlled monster. The private sector is taking advantage of a government created opportunity.
Bron, I think the Fed has been monetizing the debt in recent months. Of course it is used to fund the deficit.
I keep hoping someone will focus on the NSA scandal as a part of the MIC fleecing the taxpayers. As Snowden pointed out, we’re enriching defense contractors with trillions to deal with a problem that kills fewer people than bathtub falls (and a tiny percentage of gun violence in the USA).
The banks also need to be included in the MIC. The reason they aren’t is most people don’t understand that in our corrupt monetary system (which the Founders, Jackson and Lincoln fought against), banks create money as debt via Fractional Reserve Banking. This is the reason “war is good for the economy”, because during war the government goes deeper into debt, enriching the banks as they lend all that money into existence. All that credit flowing into the money supply does stimulate the economy, but in the end since all the money is loaned into existence, as the GDP increases workers and the productive sector still go deeper into debt to the financial sector.
Watch “The Money Masters” to learn about the hidden history of banks manipulating wars and divisive political movements for their profit.
Great post. Keep up the good work.